Search This Blog

Subscribe to this blog

Follow by Email

The Rights and Wrongs of Social Media for Newspapers

Sports Illustrated reporter Richard Deitsch is everything
that’s right with the media on Twitter, and everything that’s wrong with the
media on Twitter.

In July, CNN dubbed him as “The sportswriter
who made Twitter cry” after a photograph inspired him to ask if people had
pictures of the best moments in their life. The response was overwhelming and
he spent hours and days retweeting heartwarming photos – babies being born,
sports memories, family moments, etc. – that showed the overwhelming power of
social media.

This week, Deitsch published his weekly Media
Circus column, one of the must-reads for those in the sports media world.
In a span of 15 hours, he tweeted out the link 10 times.

That is why I am not a follower of his anymore.

The most remarkable thing about Deitsch is that he knows he excessively
tweets out his column links, as other sportswriters do. He has at times
prefaced it with, “I know you don’t like it, but rent needs to be paid, so here’s
my link 10 times.”

Deitsch has 95,000
followers. Sports Illustrated (@SINow)
has 650,000 followers. One tweet from the SI account is far more important that
Deitsch needlessly and constantly hammering his base every Sunday and Monday.

There is no doubt that causes him to lose followers. I know,
because I’m one he’s lost.

Yet I still see his column every week in my Twitter feed.
Due to the wide range of topics he covers – and the nature of sports geeks that
I follow – someone will invariably retweet his column. And therein lies the
not-so-subtle secret about social media.

The good is best demonstrated by Deitsch’s “Best Moment”
tweet as he used social media to push content out, not just pull them in. Of
course, his endless link-tweeting violates the second part. But he is far from
the only offender.

One of the aspects of social media that frustrated me about
newspapers is the seeming resistance to bring life to their “official”
accounts. So many newspapers use Twitter like an RSS feed – mindlessly tweeting
out articles with headlines and links.

To be fair, there is value in this and the newspaper will invariably
attract followers by doing so.

What it fails to do, however, is expand the brand beyond the
readers who are likely predisposed to visiting the site anyway. All the links
do is getting them to the site quicker – though not necessarily in greater
numbers.

It should be the case at every newspaper that there is a
human who tweets. Preferably, more than one human. Because just posting links
is not effective anymore. For one, the headlines on the article may not be
adept for social media – it may need to be tweaked, made shorter or made more
relevant. Is there anything worse than a long headline cut off on a Tweet due
to character length?

Secondly, by simply posting links and articles, you are removing
the integral part to Twitter’s success – you know, the social part. There has
to be that element, even from the official account, of interaction with
readers. There is so much discussion around reader
engagement in traditional methods that many are missing the forest for the
trees – a simple @ response or favorite can go a long way to making a reader
feel like the newspaper is invested in them.

Then there is notion of scheduled tweets – the increasing
amount of research devoted to social media that determines when is the best
time to send out social media. “Oh, let’s wait until 11.” “No, anything
after 4pm is worthless.”

To a degree, this is true – stats exist for a reason. But
going back to the “content is king” mantra, what you tweet out is far more
important than when you tweet it out.

When Deitsch sent out his initial tweet that spawned all of those
media articles came out just
before midnight on a July weeknight. If you were to look at the research, I’m
not sure you could have picked a worst time to make an impact through social
media.

And that, of course, is the kicker about social media –
there are no right’s or wrong’s. It’s organic. It’s different. It’s almost
impossible to formulate and fool.

While I think that tweeting out a link to your article 10
times in a day is too much, there are those that argue you cannot tweet too
much. While I may believe that there is no right time to tweet, there is plenty
of evidence to the contrary.

In short, there is only one indisputable fact about how
newspapers should use social media – they need to invest time and resources to
it.

While I worked at the Hartford Business Journal, I had an
editor tell me to not start a blog for my weekly column because “no one reads
blogs” and to not worry about a Facebook page for it because “that won’t drive
website traffic.” I’m not here to mock that guy but…yeah, he was stupid.

Maybe that’s the advice all newspapers should heed: Don’t be
stupid.

The best way to use social media is different for every
newspaper out there, depending on its readership, its community, its focus
areas, its scope and its personality. Every newspaper needs to figure out what’s
best for them – and they’ll only figure that out from trying.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to tweet this out 24 times and see if I
rack up some page views.

Twitter is one of the most flourishing social media marketing websites. The character-limited mini-blog attribute of twitter help in attracting various users around worldwide. Being in touch with the near and dear ones has become easy with the social networks. You can make new friends here and expand your tree of friendship. You can follow Twitter from many websites. You can buy real twitter followers using few methods of buying in bulk.Few websites market the followers with various twitter followers’ packages. To show that your website is social website-friendly, you can buy these packages. You can search to buy the packages and you can buy twitter followers cheap at some websites. Buying the package makes it easy to get followers and will definitely increase your business. Every youngster own Twitter account and they will follow whatever they like on the websites they browse.

Making friends is important but do you really want to go to the extent of buying friends or followers? Friends are supposed to be chosen. It is true that in some aspects social networking sites like twitter but it also brings us together but it also drives us apart. Once I was in the same room with my best friend and instead of telling me to switch on the light she had to text me and we were the only ones in the room. Young people today follow a lot of persons that's be like online but could those people be good influences for them? They affects their choices and may lead them through career paths they may not have chosen on their own . Youngsters should never be left alone online for a long time as it takes them away from away from relevant things. Time is consumed with tweeting random thoughts and posting pictures. You could befriend a "friends friend" who may be everything from a stalker to a sexual predator. Yes this networks are proving to be very good for businesses but also consider the people you want to reach out to. Reposting a link so many times does not draw people to you rather its pushes them away because they may feel forced to take on products that they do not need. How are those businesses sure that they are going to buy the right kind of followers for their product.The internet and those social network sites have good uses but remember that everything is better when done in moderation so beware.